Clinical and radiographics results at 3 years of RCT with split-mouth design of submerged vs. nonsubmerged single laser-microgrooved implants in posterior areas

Renzo Guarnieri, Dario Di Nardo, Gianni Di Giorgio, Gabriele Miccoli, Luca Testarelli, Renzo Guarnieri, Dario Di Nardo, Gianni Di Giorgio, Gabriele Miccoli, Luca Testarelli

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate and compare radiographic crestal bone loss (CBL) and soft tissue parameters around submerged/two-stage and nonsubmerged/one-stage single implants with the same endosseous portion (body design and surface, thread design and distance) and identical intramucosal laser-microgrooved surface, after 3 years of loading.

Materials and methods: Twenty submerged/two-stage implants and 20 nonsubmerged/one-stage implants were placed randomly with a split-mouth design in the posterior areas of 20 partially edentulous patients. Radiographic and clinical examinations were carried out at the implant placement, at the delivery of prosthetic restorations, and at each year of the follow-up period. Plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and gingival recession (REC) were recorded. Radiographic crestal bone levels were assessed at the mesial and distal aspect of the implant sites. In addition, the influence of the vertical keratinized tissue thickness (KTT) on CBL was investigated.

Results: At the delivery of prosthetic restorations, a statistically significant difference (P = 0.013) was found in radiographic mean CBL between submerged and nonsubmerged implants (0.15 ± 0.05 mm vs. 0.11 ± 0.04 mm). At the end of the follow-up period, no statistical difference (P = 0.741) was found in the mean CBL between submerged and nonsubmerged implants (0.27 ± 04 mm vs. 0.26 ± 0.5 mm). The changes in the soft tissues including PI, PD, BOP, and REC had no significant differences in either group. Moreover, KTT did not show a statistical correlation with CBL.

Conclusions: After 3 years of loading, no statistical difference was noted in CBL and soft tissue conditions between single submerged two-stage and nonsubmerged one-stage laser-microgrooved implants.

Trial registration: https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT03674762.

Keywords: Dental implants; Marginal bone loss; Nonsubmerged one-stage; Submerged two-stage.

Conflict of interest statement

Renzo Guarnieri, Dario Di Nardo, Gianni Di Giorgio, Gabriele Miccoli, and Luca Testarelli state that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Example of the location of a non-submerged implant, bone, and adjacent tooth
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Example of the location of a submerged implant, bone, and adjacent tooth
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Implants used in the present study and laser-microtextured intramucosal surface (original magnification × 800)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Schematic view of radiographic measurement references
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Mean values of probing depth (PD) between the two groups during the follow-up period. ANOVA test P > 0.05
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Mean values of gingival recession (REC) between the two groups at the end of follow-up period (3-year). ANOVA test
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Changes of CBL (mm) between the two groups in sites with KKT > 2 and ≤ 2 mm. ANOVA test
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Mean values of crestal bone loss (CBL) between the two groups during the follow-up period. ANOVA test

References

    1. Esposito M, Coulthard P, Thomsen P, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different types of dental implants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;1:CD003815.
    1. Brånemark PI, Breine U, Adell R, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intraosseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1969;3(2):81–100. doi: 10.3109/02844316909036699.
    1. Brånemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, Breine U, Lindström J, Hallén O, et al. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1977;16:1–99.
    1. Schroeder A, Pohler O, Sutter F. Tissue reaction to an implant of a titanium hollow cylinder with a titanium surface spray layer. SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd. 1976;86(7):713–727.
    1. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Impl Res. 1997;8:161–172. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080302.x.
    1. Cecchinato D, Olsson C, Lindhe J. Submerged or non-submerged healing of endosseous implants to be used in the rehabilitation of partially dentate patients. J Clin Periodont. 2004;31:299–308. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00527.x.
    1. Becktor JP, Isaksson S, Billström C. A prospective multicenter study using two different surgical approaches in the mandible with turned Brånemark implants: conventional loading using fixed prostheses. Clin Impl Dent Rel Res. 2007;9:179–185. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2007.00041.x.
    1. Cordaro L, Torsello F, Roccuzzo M. Clinical outcome of submerged vs. non-submerged implants placed in fresh extraction sockets. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2009;20:1307–1313. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01724.x.
    1. Moustafa Ali RM, Alqutaibi AY, El-Din Gomaa AS, Abdallah MF. Effect of submerged vs nonsubmerged implant placement protocols on implant failure and marginal bone loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Prosthodont. 2018;31(1):15–22. doi: 10.11607/ijp.5315.
    1. Ericsson I, Randow K, Nilner K, Petersson A. Some clinical and radiographical features of submerged and non-submerged titanium implants. A 5-year follow-up study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997;8:422–426. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080509.x.
    1. Astrand P, Engquist B, Anzén B, et al. Nonsubmerged and sub-merged implants in the treatment of the partially edentulous maxilla. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2002;4:115–127. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2002.tb00161.x.
    1. Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Chew YS, Coulthard P, Worthington HV. One-stage versus two-stage implant placement. A Cochrane systematic review of randomised controlled clinical trials. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2009;2(2):91–99.
    1. Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Dimension of the periimplant mucosa. Biological width revisited. J Clin Periodontol. 1996;23:971–973. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.1996.tb00520.x.
    1. Flores-Guillen J, Álvarez-Novoa C, Barbieri G, Martín C, Sanz M. Five-year outcomes of a randomized clinical trial comparing bone-level implants with either submerged or transmucosal healing. J Clin Periodontol. 2018;45(1):125–135. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12832.
    1. Cecchinato D, Bengazi F, Blasi G, Botticelli D, Cardarelli I, Gualini F. Bone level alterations at implants placed in the posterior segments of the dentition: outcome of submerged/non-submerged healing. A 5-year multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2008;19:429–431. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01493.x.
    1. Siadat H, Panjnoosh M, Alikhasi M, Alihoseini M, Bassir SH, Rokn AR. Does implant staging choice affect crestal bone loss? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;70(2):307–313. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2011.09.006.
    1. Gheisari R, Eatemadi H, Alavian A. Comparison of the marginal bone loss in one-stage versus two-stage implant surgery. J Dent (Shiraz). 2017;18(4):272–276.
    1. Hermann, J.S, Cochran, D.L., Nummikoski, P.V. & Buser, D. Crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A radiographic evaluation of unloaded non-submerged and submerged implants in the canine mandible. J Periodontol 1997; 68: 1117–1130.
    1. Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D. Bacterial colonization of the internal part of two-stage implants. An in vivo study. Clin Oral Impl Res. 1993;4:158–161. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1993.040307.x.
    1. Persson LG, Lekholm U, Leonhardt Å, Dahlen G, Lindhe J. Bacterial colonization on internal surfaces of Brånemark systemA implant components. Clin Oral Impl Res. 1996;7:90–95. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070201.x.
    1. Jansen VK, Conrads G, Richter E-J. Microbial leakage and marginal fit of the implant–abutment interface. Int J Oral Maxillofacial Impl. 1997;12:527–540.
    1. Broggini N, McManus LM, Hermann JS, Medina RU, Oates TW, Schenk RK, et al. Persistent acute inflammation at the implant-abutment interface. J Dent Res. 2003;82:232–237. doi: 10.1177/154405910308200316.
    1. Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T. Effects of different implant surfaces and designs on marginal bone-level alterations: a systematic review. Clin Oral Imp Res. 2009;20(Suppl. 4):207–215. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01783.x.
    1. Al Amri MD. Crestal bone loss around submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(5):564–570.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.11.002.
    1. Sanz M, Ivanoff CJ, Weingart D, Wiltfang J, Gahlert M, Cordaro L, Ganeles J, Bragger U, Jackowski J, Martin WC, Jung RE, Chen S, Hammerle C. Clinical and radiologic outcomes after submerged and transmucosal implant placement with two-piece implants in the anterior maxilla and mandible: 3-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(2):234–246. doi: 10.1111/cid.12107.
    1. Nevins M, Nevins ML, Camelo M, Boyesen JL, Kim DM. Human histologic evidence of a connective tissue attachment to a dental implant. International Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2008;28(2):111–121.
    1. Nevins M, Camelo M, Nevins ML, Schupbach P, Kim DM. Reattachment of connective tissue fibers to a laser-microgrooved abutment surface. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2012;32(4):e131–e134.
    1. Suárez-López Del Amo F, Lin GH, Monje A, Galindo-Moreno P, Wang H-L. Influence of soft tissue thickness on peri-implant marginal bone loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol. 2016;87:690–699. doi: 10.1902/jop.2016.150571.
    1. Akcali A, Trullenque-Eriksson A, Sun C, Petrie A, Nibali L, Donos N. What is the effect of soft tissue thickness on crestal bone loss around dental implants? A systematic review. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2017;28:1045–1053. doi: 10.1111/clr.12916.
    1. Linkevicius T, Apse P, Grybauskas S, Puisys A. The influence of soft tissue thickness on crestal bone changes around implants: a 1-year prospective controlled clinical trial. Int J Oral & Maxillofacial Impl. 2009;24:712–719.
    1. Hermann JS, Buser D, Schenk RK, Cochran DL. (2000) Crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A histometric evaluation of unloaded non-submerged and submerged implants in the canine mandible. J Periodontol. 2000;71:1412–1424. doi: 10.1902/jop.2000.71.9.1412.
    1. HermannJ S, Buser D, Schenk RK, Schoolfield JD, Cochran DL. Biologic width around one- and two-piece titanium implants. Clinl Oral Impl Res. 2001;12:559–571. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120603.x.
    1. Hermann JS, Schoolfield JD, Schenk RK, Buser D, Cochran DL. Influence of the size of the microgap on crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A histometric evaluation of unloaded non-submerged implants in the canine mandible. J Periodontol. 2001;72:1372–1383. doi: 10.1902/jop.2001.72.10.1372.
    1. Derks J, Håkansson J, Wennström JL, Tomasi C, Larsson M, Berglundh T. Effectiveness of implant therapy analyzed in a Swedish population: early and late implant loss. J Dent Res. 2015;94(3 Suppl):44S–51S. doi: 10.1177/0022034514563077.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다